2. In the case of a dispute relating to a European patent with unitary effect, the patent proprietor shall provide in the course of legal proceedings, at the request of a court competent in the territories of the participating Member States for disputes concerning European patents with unitary effect, a full translation of the patent into the language of the proceedings of that court.

(7) For reasons of legal certainty, all actions relating to certain aspects of the Community patent should come under the jurisdiction of one court, and the decisions of that court should be enforceable throughout the Community. Exclusive jurisdiction for a certain category of actions and applications relating to a Community patent, and in particular for actions relating to infringement and validity, should therefore be given to the Community intellectual property court.

35. Regards as exceptionally regrettable the failure to make any progress with European patent policy and as unacceptable the failure to develop a uniform European patent strategy; draws attention to the outcome of its consideration of the European patent regulation at first reading, which points to a solution to the problems which have not yet been resolved in the Council; calls on the Commission immediately to submit proposals for a new patent strategy so that a fresh basis for negotiations in the Council can be established without delay; calls on the Member States to adopt an effective patent system based on past consultations, inc ...[+++]luding consideration of participation in the European patent litigation agreement , to ensure progress and legal security as fast as possible;

– (PL) Mr President, the significant increase in patent applications is adding to the impact of unclear patent law.

39. Asks the Member States to implement the abovementioned Directive 98/44/EC and to recognise that the decision of the European Patents Office on the so-called Edinburgh Patent in July 2002 shows that ethical concerns are respected by the European Patents Office; regrets on the other hand that the earlier mistake on this patent by the Patents Office was discovered by Greenpeace (and not by the Patents Office itself); asks the European Patents Office to review its working methods, so that such mistakes will not be repeated and, refe ...[+++]rs to its resolution of 30 March 2000 on the Decision of the Patents Office on the cloning of human beings;

34. Asks the Member States to implement the Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of the 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological interventions and to recognise that the decision of the European Patents Office, on the so-called Edinburgh Patent in July 2002, shows that ethical concerns are respected by the European Patents Office; regrets on the other hand that the earlier mistake on this patent by the Patents Office was discovered by Greenpeace (and not by the Patents Office itself); asks the ...[+++]European Patents Office to review its working methods, so that such mistakes will not be repeated and, refers to its resolution of 30 March 2000 on the 'Decision of the Patents Office on the cloning of Human beings';